Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 329 posts

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#31

Post by andsoitis »

juujian wrote: post #25
andsoitis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

I think you should get your sarcasm detector checked. He was referring to the recent surge of empty CEO statements built around the "full responsibility" cliche.

Sure, but when you look at the history of comments around this theme (CEO, layoffs), it seems pretty clear that people want a CEO to take responsibility in some other way that laying off staff.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#32

Post by flanked-evergl »

andsoitis wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #3

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

> If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly.

If he suffers no negative consequences then in what way is he taking responsibility? This is just meaningless psychobabble. He could not say it and it would be no different.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#33

Post by germinalphrase »

andsoitis wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #3

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

"Reducing comp as punishment would also not make sense, for obvious reasons."

If leadership is financially incentivized for positive outcomes, why shouldn't they carry downside financial risk as well?

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#34

Post by brazzledazzle »

andsoitis wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #3

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

It's a reference to the Google CEO's statement about their layoffs and I think the point is that it's an empty platitude.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#36

Post by tgv »

andsoitis wrote: post #17
voytec wrote: post #3

The real question is: does the CEO take full responsibility?

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

You have a pretty one-dimensional view of a company's goal. Well, many have, especially the higher-ups in the US, of course, making those vision statements more of a joke than they ever were. But for some, companies have a responsibility towards their employees, customers and environment as well.

In your hyper-financialized viewpoint, the CEO's job should be to make as much money for him/herself as possible.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#37

Post by neon_electro »

mguerville wrote: post #19
badhombres wrote: post #12

Not surprising. Every company is going to take the opportunity to trim costs when it doesn't affect their PR as much as it would any other time.

And not doing so could affect their IR (investor relations) negatively, which is a higher concern than PR to most companies

Why can't a company do offense on the IR front with literally any action other than cutting workforce?

"Our products are better than ever" "Our revenue per employee is better than ever"

Why does cutting costs have to be the only way to please investors?

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#38

Post by jmathai »

mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

This post agrees that it’s essentially copycat behavior.

https://news.stanford.edu/2022/12/05/explains-recent-tech-la...

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#39

Post by TremendousJudge »

mcv wrote: post #24

I really get the feeling that many companies are just blindly doing whatever other companies do. One starts large layoffs, and suddenly everybody is doing it. At other times, when one goes on a hiring spree, they all go. One tries to reduce salaries, they all do. One pays enormous bonuses, and they all do. It's like CEOs aren't really thinking for themselves, just copying whatever the market does.

Yeah, this CEO technology is interesting but ultimately going nowhere, it's only remixing existing decisions and not having any original innovations. Plus, as CEO decisions get fed back into the models, it's going to get even worse, like a photocopy of a photocopy.

Re: Tell HN: Confluent laying off 8% of staff

#40

Post by andsoitis »

tgv wrote: post #36
andsoitis wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CEO's job (responsibility) is not to give people jobs, but to steer a company for success on behalf of the owners. If your comment ("CEO takes full responsibility") is suggesting s/he should be fired or compensation reduced because of their misread of the future, that would be quite silly. Companies don't fire people for making mistakes (in fact if you make no mistakes you probably should be let go because you're…

You have a pretty one-dimensional view of a company's goal. Well, many have, especially the higher-ups in the US, of course, making those vision statements more of a joke than they ever were. But for some, companies have a responsibility towards their employees, customers and environment as well. In your hyper-financialized viewpoint, the CEO's job should be to make as much money for him/herself as possible.

> In your hyper-financialized viewpoint, the CEO's job should be to make as much money for him/herself as possible.

No, the CEO is meant to optimize not for themselves, but for the owners of the company. If the CEO didn't do that, the board should fire them.

Post reply on HN